What are some car-repair jobs you always wished you could do but have never done?

wrote:

>>I understand the magic of computers getting more reliable but what's the
>>magic in cars getting more reliable?
> That's easy - Computers!!!

Computers help make a lot of things not break.

For example, fuel injection and a distributorless single coil per spark
plug with a nice high voltage all by themselves prevented a billion
tuneups.

The EPA making exhaust systems have to last longer under warranty made the
manufacturers make them out of stainless steel instead of pre-rusted
Detroit steel.

There are computers in plenty of other places (for example, ABS), but other
than the fuel injection, where did computers play a role in engine
longevity?

I'm not saying they didn't, but I don't see how they play a role in engine
longevity other than in the tuneup arena where they were an immense help.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>> When was the last time you replaced the old "points plugs and
>> condenser" That used to be a once or twice a year thing.
>>
>
> Don't forget better lubricants too.

Are the lubricants really contributing to longevity of the engine?

The main lubricant, of course, is motor oil, which has gone from SB to SC,
to SD to SE .... now to somewhere around SL, SM, SN ... but has *that* been
contributing to engine life by a lot?

The other lubricants, of course, are the gear oils, but again, GL4 and GL5
are pretty old stuff.

I don't remember seeing Zerk fittings lately, so I think one thing with
respect to lubrication is they made permanently lubricated driveshaft
u-joints and suspension balljoints.

But really. Do we have any evidence that lubrication is why engines seem to
last longer nowadays?

wrote:

>>I understand the magic of computers getting more reliable but what's the
>>magic in cars getting more reliable?
>
> More quality in the manufacture along with the fact that a lot of the
> things that used to fail were replaced by computers that do a far
> better job that Mr Venturi.

I'm going to have to agree that I think the only thing that really changed
over time was the quality.

I think Japan took half of Detroit's profits, and that was the sole
determinant that made Detroit start thinking about quality.

If that's the case, you have to hand it to Japan for even coming up with
the idea of quality in the first place.

> When was the last time you replaced the old "points plugs and
> condenser" That used to be a once or twice a year thing.

Wow. My timing light is still packed away, along with the dwellmeter. Every
once in a while I use the feeler gauges that I used to use for points, but
for something else. Even the spark plug gapper is used, but nowadays only
on the home tools like the leaf blower. I have a contraption that has a
heavy duty switch for "bumping" the engine. I forget even why I *built*
that thing.

Why did we bump the engine? I forget why.

I also still have a dial gauge that I screwed into the number one cylinder
on a motorcycle to time the points on the bike where there is no concept of
a timing light. The points open in millimeters before TDC.

It's rare though for tools to go out of style. I'm still using my first
Christmas gift of Sears Craftsman open-end wrenches, for example.

wrote:

> No, it's because of advances in metalurgy, lubrication,
> manufacturing, and to a VERY large extent, advances in engine
> controls.

I'm not going to disagree that engines seem to last twice what they used
to, but is metallurgy really different? There's a lot more aluminum
nowadays, and certainly too much plastic, but rubber is rubber and steel is
steel and I don't think either got all that much better in the interim.

Engine controls maybe. But they're mostly emission related nowadays.

The actual danger zone parts are the oil pressure sensor, coolant
temperature sensor, oil lever sensor, etc., and I don't think they're all
that sophisticated compared to the days of yore, do you?

> Lead free gasoline has a LARGE effect on the improvement of engine
> life, as along with the lead, phosphorous was also virtually
> eliminated in the fuel.
> This means a lot less acids in the oil, exhaust, etc.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.... really? The fuel contributes to engine life?
I don't dispute. I just don't compute.

> With the replacement of carb and choke with EFI, there
> is less fuel dilution - and electronic ignition and timing advance
> just adds to the improvements. In 1959, the auto was still an
> adolescent - it has matured over the ensuing decades in SO many ways.

I don't disagree that the carburetor is gone, thank God, but it's still in
airplanes and they seem to do fine with them (small planes that is).

While EFI is great stuff, I don't see that the longevity of an engine is
dependent on the fuel volatilization method.

> Rust and corrosion control has come SO far, even since the eighties
> that there is really no reason a car body should rust today - and the
> bodies, although MUCH lighter, do last 2, 3, even 5 times as long.

This one I agree with you on, but I blame Detroit for making crap that they
*knew* was crap. Painting can't be all that sophisticated today compared to
yesterday. It just can't be. They just did a lousy job before, I think.

But then again, painting is a job I never did, so, maybe I didn't learn
anything!

> Car finishes as well - was not uncommon for a 3 or 4 year old car to
> require a repaint in the old days - now MOST go to the scrapyard
> wearing their original coat of paint - - - - even with water based
> paints!!!!

I wish I knew more about painting.

> Often TWICE a year - spring and fall tuneups were common.

I agree that points were a weak link that just had to go. I'm not sure why
timing changed, because, as I recall, we twisted the distributor to time
the engine where, the distributor would have no reason to twist back once
locked down.

I think they also used lower-voltage coils in those days, where the wires
seemed paradoxically to require replacement more often. I remember once
diagnosing a misfire where I accidentally worked until it got dark and then
realized there was a light show going on with all the sparks to ground.

Heh heh heh ... working on coils and ignition wires teaches a youngster
with a steel screwdriver a *lot* about electricity wanting to get to
ground!

>>Now, they're "almost" lifetime parts because they don't exist.
> Even spark plugs go 100,000 km plus - - -

Oh yeah. I forgot about spark plugs. I had a two-stroke motorcycle, for
example, which couldn't go five hundred miles on a set of plugs.

Now you can easily go 100K where the technology isn't all that fancy on a
plug. It's just a chunk of platinum-plated metal near a few J hooks of cold
steel. I think the higher voltages helped, which, again, paradoxically,
you'd think the higher coil voltages would eat the plugs faster ... not
slower by the process of electrodialectric machining.

> Better design, engine controls, lubricants, and no more leaded gas.

Well, it's *something* that makes car engines last twice what they used to,
but I don't see that we've nailed it yet.

I still think it's simply that Japanaese cars existing made Detroit build
better engines overall.

> Most did - but there were (natable) exceptions.
> Also, how long have you been driving? What is the oldest car you have
> owned??

Most of us old timers have at the very least a million miles under our
belts. When we were kids, all our cars started at 10 or 15 years old, where
that was new to us.

In my salesman days, a car lasted 3 years, but now I'm back to the 15 or 20
year range since I retired long ago.

Such things change over time.


>>Luckily, 2WD RWD cars spread out the "stuff" in manageable ways.
>
> They ARE easier to repair - in general.

I found that 2WD RWD cars are a LOT easier, for the most part, and also if
you have the option, the six cylinder options when an 8-cylinder option
exists or the 4 cylinder option when a 6 cylinder option exists is a
Godsend because you have so much more room in that engine bay.

>>Otherwise, time isn't the issue.
> You don't have a wife????

She's somewhere in the garden, not the garage.
The kids have kids already too, so they're off somewhere to play.

I get to see them on Thanksgiving though. Thank God for holidays!
You pay for their school. You pay for their grad school.
And then you only get to see them on holidays.
Or when they need their cars fixed!

rbowman wrote:

>> Well, if replacing a timing belt is that easy, then maybe it's not so much
>> a crime that they put a 60k-mile part inside an interference engine.
>
> It'd the suspense that kills you. My Harley has a belt drive and the
> belt failed at around 45000. No sign of damage or deterioration just a
> clean break. I rode to work in the morning, came out, started the
> engine, let the clutch out and didn't go anyplace.
>
> Replacement is fairly easy on a Sportster but Harley is very proud of
> their belts, around $150 iirc. All things considered that's cheaper than
> chains if you put significant miles on a bike.

You're confusing me because you're talking about a drive system for the
rear wheel, where there are three types on motorcycles
a. Chain (most common)
b. Shaft (common on beamers for example)
c. Belt (common harleys I guess)

We were talking about timing belts inside car engines.

The problem with timing belts on some engines is when they break, the
pistons can contact the valves, which is the dumbest bit of engineering I
have ever seen in my life.

In that case, I would agree that the suspense is what kills you because
they may last 60K miles but they may not.

wrote:

> KD makes a special tool for that - at the value O put on skin and
> suffering, cheap at twice the price

This is the interesting thing about tools for working on cars.

Very few of the common jobs require any special tools that you don't
already have, which are the common tools that everyone has.

Every once in a while, you need a special waterpump holding tool, or a
special brake caliper hex wrench size or a special clutch spline alignment
tool or a special balljoint separator tool or a special bearing puller or a
special harmonic balancer puller or a special transmission jack.

The nice thing is that the money you save on labor almost always has you
more than break even on the tool costs, except in your very first jobs in
your life when you're just a kid.

When you're just a kid, you have to buy jack stands for the first time, and
ramps for the first time and brakespring pliers for the first time and a
dwellmeter and timing light for the first time and feeler gauges for the
first time and a floor jack for the first time, and so on.

Truth be told, you often buy the major tools twice, since you try to go
cheap the first time, so, for example, you buy the tube-type cheaper $15
jack stands (the ones with holes drilled in a pipe) and finally, when
you're older, you spring for the notched ones instead.

Likewise you buy the small cheap floor jack, when years later you spring
for the heavy duty one.

The worst is that you buy the least amount of wrenches and sockets in the
beginning, then you learn later (way later) that you ended up buying one by
one a million extender bars and u joints and deep and shallow and impact
sockets, that you should have just sprung for the $1000 set in the first
place.

But you never had the money when you bought the tools for the first time
(just as you stored them in hand tool boxes until you sprung for the big
boy years later).

So, yeah, you buy tools twice sometimes, but that's only because you didn't
have the money and you didn't have anyone to advise you when you were a
kid.

>>The ones I did were simple. The hard part was remembering how the damn
>>springs on the drums went. I couldn't believe how easy pads were; it
>>took me longer to find the C-clamp than to do the work :-(
> A cell phone camera makes all of that SO much simpler!!!

Yup. The cellphone camera replaced pen and paper diagrams!

The Real Bev wrote:

>> but with
>> brakes there's the whole shebang from pads and sensors to calipers and
>> rotors and bearings and speed sensors, and abs intricacies.
>
> The ones I did were simple. The hard part was remembering how the damn
> springs on the drums went. I couldn't believe how easy pads were; it
> took me longer to find the C-clamp than to do the work :-(

That's the thing about brakes that gets me.

Most people I know pay upwards of $1K for a 4-wheel brake job at the
dealer, where (a) I would never go to the dealer, and (b) I would never pay
even $100 for someone else to do a brake job.

Most brake jobs are so easy that it's not funny since disc brakes are so
easy to work on that it's not even close to funny. Drum brakes are harder
simply because of the intricacies of the springs, but they're only harder
because disc brakes are so easy.

Pads cost about $50 per set and all you aim for is FF or GG or FG, or
whatever cold/hot heat rating you want. That's another thing about doing a
job yourself, which is parts selection.

If you do it yourself, you have to buy the parts, and if you buy the parts
you figure out what matters.

Most of us follow the same rules for buying parts, do we not?
a. First we figure out what the OEM parts are, and, then,
b. We figure out how much it costs for better parts.

Sometimes the OEM parts are the best, but just as often, the aftermarket
parts are better.

In the case of brake pads, we look up the cold/hot friction ratings for the
OEM pads. Let's say that they're FG. Then we look at the aftermarket for
better pads. Let's say we find GG pads. We look at the cost difference.
And we usually buy the better pad.

As for rotors, there's a truckload of hype around slotted, drilled, drilled
and slotted, etc., where at least motorcycle rotors are stainless steel and
where looks matter a lot. On cars, looks only matter if you have wheels
that show off your brakes, so drilled and slotted or all that other purely
pretty stuff doesn't matter. Solid is the way to go. The cheaper the
better. For example, you can get Brembo rotors for less than the OEM
rotors, where a rotor is a rotor is a rotor.

About $50 per axle for pads, and about $50 per wheel for rotors, and you're
out the door with parts (a few dabs of high-temperature grease later).

Notice that when you do the work yourself, you LEARN what matters. If
you're smart about it, you don't fall for the marketing hype.

And one more thing. Since you do the work yourself, you buy the tools,
where brake jobs don't necessarily take special tools (although calipers
sometimes need oddball-sized hex wrenches on German cars).

All you need is a mic to measure thickness and a dial gauge and stand to
measure runout, and if you're doing drums, two types of brake-spring
pliers, and you're good to go with tools.

One more thing, the word "brake warp" or "rotor warp" is banished from your
vocabulary. Anyone who uses those two words, is simply proving they're an
utter fool.

That's the kind of stuff you learn by doing the job yourself.

"RS Wood" > wrote in message
news wrote:

>>For example, in the olden days, how many rotted out "mufflers" did you
>>replace compared to today?
> No lead and phosphorous in the gas makes a BIG difference - as does
> more complete combustion. Stainless steel doesn't hurt either.

Yet there is a lot more aluminum in engines nowadays.

I don't see how the lead matters although we all went through the phase
where we switched from leaded cars to lead-free cars and had to change
pumps in the process.

I still don't see how the *gas* has anything to do with engines lasting
longer. Maybe it does, but I don't see the connection.

+++++++++++++++++++

The lead fowled the plugs pretty quickly. Now they can last 100k miles.

RS Wood wrote on 11/4/2017 5:49 PM:
> rickman wrote:
>
>> They make things to last as long as the consumer demands. Kids toys were
>> not all built solidly when we were kids. Tonka was a high priced toy.
>> Today they still make quality toys. I don't know if Tonka uses UV
>> stabilizers, but I know there are some kids plastic playhouses that seem to
>> last for many years outside.
>
> The only plastic that I know of which lasts forever outside is whatever
> plastic the garbage company uses for those blue, green, and gray wheeled
> bins!

That's your standard? Things have to last "forever"???


> I wish *all* plastic things were made out of *that* plastic, especially
> pool tools.

You can ask about the materials when you buy stuff. It's not the plastic,
but whether the plastic has UV resistance additives.


>> Cars didn't get better until the Japanese showed the US consumer there was a
>> choice. Detroit and Wolfsburg, etc only learned after the Japanese started
>> eating their lunches.
>
> I think I may tend to agree with you which is why I mentioned that Japan
> may have had a lot to do with Detroit making more reliable cars.
>
> I think also the EPA forcing the manufacturer to warrant the emissions
> system for longer periods of time helped.
>
> For example, in the olden days, how many rotted out "mufflers" did you
> replace compared to today?

I still have to replace the exhaust system ever four years. That part
hasn't changed. If you know anything about why they fail, you would
understand the only alternative is stainless steel which is *much* more
expensive. You could get a stainless steel exhaust system the first time
you replace it, but you would need to keep the vehicle for twenty more years
to make it pay off.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998

wrote:

>>I still don't see how the *gas* has anything to do with engines lasting
>>longer. Maybe it does, but I don't see the connection.
>
> Lead free along with EFI is why plugs last forever.

That's an enigma to me, but if I think it through, EFI allowed for higher
voltages which I'd think would melt a spark plug even more than the lower
voltages, but maybe what happened is a higher voltage zap keeps the plugs
from fouling. The zap may even be shorter for all I know.

The lack of tetraethyl lead, I guess, besides meaning harder valve seats,
means fewer deposits on the plugs I guess, where deposits that conduct
electricity cause the voltage to bleed off down the center electrode to the
threads.

Is that how the lead and efi helped plugs last forever?

The enigma is that the higher voltage "should" eat the metal faster.